wow! just read over at fierce cable website where cablevision now has a 10 tuner dvr that lets you record 10 shows at once!!! Makes me wish cablevision was available in my area! I hate to say it but tivo seems to be getting further and further behind.

wow! just read over at fierce cable website where cablevision now has a 10 tuner dvr that lets you record 10 shows at once!!! Makes me wish cablevision was available in my area! I hate to say it but tivo seems to be getting further and further behind.

its not a "10 tuner dvr" its their regular sh*t box that will allow you to "record" 10 shows in the cloud. its software that tells their servers that you want to record the shows, it records on their end and held there until you play them. nothing is stored on your dvr or at your premises.

its DVR +, the two tuner version they've had for a few years now, and it barely works.

wow! just read over at fierce cable website where cablevision now has a 10 tuner dvr that lets you record 10 shows at once!!! Makes me wish cablevision was available in my area! I hate to say it but tivo seems to be getting further and further behind.

You did get that they are talking about a "network" DVR not an actual physical DVR in someone's home right? And what cable company has had an actual 4 tuner DVR for almost 2 years like TiVo? - Let me help you out none that I know of.

Not cable, but for all practical purposes, DISH, since it uses 1 tuner to record all of the broadcast channels -- which get far higher ratings than most cable shows. Even though I have cable, and have Premiere 4 that requires cable, most of what I watch is from broadcast channels. (I originally got cable long ago since I would have to turn the antenna 180 degrees to get one of the channels I wanted, which of course made unattended recording effectively impossible -- yes I could have theoretically rigged it on a timer or something.)

wow! just read over at fierce cable website where cablevision now has a 10 tuner dvr that lets you record 10 shows at once!!! Makes me wish cablevision was available in my area! I hate to say it but tivo seems to be getting further and further behind.

No big deal. My HTPC has had 17 tuners for quite a while that can record to the hard drive (and it actually works quite well ).

its not a "10 tuner dvr" its their regular sh*t box that will allow you to "record" 10 shows in the cloud. its software that tells their servers that you want to record the shows, it records on their end and held there until you play them. nothing is stored on your dvr or at your premises.

its DVR +, the two tuner version they've had for a few years now, and it barely works.

So lets take the crappiness of the actual box out of the equation and just consider the cloud aspect.

Good, no?

With a decent internet connection (and no data caps), this seems like a good idea instead of having 300+ hours of content stored on one local hard drive.

So lets take the crappiness of the actual box out of the equation and just consider the cloud aspect.

Good, no?

With a decent internet connection (and no data caps), this seems like a good idea instead of having 300+ hours of content stored on one local hard drive.

i dont think so. what if your internet connection goes down for a long period of time? you wont be able to watch your recordings. what if cablevision CO has issues and cant record the shows for you? also, i am not sure if these recordings are delivered to you via IP or QAM, but what if its IP and its 8 pm and the node is saturated. you're going to have fun trying to FF a commercial.

its a neat idea and step forward, but as someone who used to have cablevision before Fios came along, let me tell you, CV is not known for their stellar network.

I'd surmise that rather than actually recording ten shows and storing them for you online it's actually just putting the shows in a VOD queue and allowing you to access them at your leisure. Chances are they'll end up highly compressed to conserve space and bandwidth for streaming. It's ridiculous to think that they would actually make separate recordings of a show that may get hundreds of requests to record. When they get the request it will be added to the list of shows to be processed and placed on the VOD server. The list of requested shows will show up somewhere under your name with a link to retrieve them for viewing.

I'd surmise that rather than actually recording ten shows and storing them for you online it's actually just putting the shows in a VOD queue and allowing you to access them at your leisure. Chances are they'll end up highly compressed to conserve space and bandwidth for streaming. It's ridiculous to think that they would actually make separate recordings of a show that may get hundreds of requests to record. When they get the request it will be added to the list of shows to be processed and placed on the VOD server. The list of requested shows will show up somewhere under your name with a link to retrieve them for viewing.

they make actual recordings for the user when it is requested and only used for that user. thats how they won the court battle, read the case.

they make actual recordings for the user when it is requested and only used for that user. thats how they won the court battle, read the case.

What court battle? What case? And what's it got to do with recording shows on a server? There has been no mention of any court battle so far in this thread.

Having shows available for VOD hasn't been an issue with providers AFAIK. Recording shows without compressing them for streaming to the end user is an unlikely scenario without having a huge amount of bandwidth available. I don't have the actual facts so I'm just making assumptions based on common sense and the way providers tend to do business. Recording the same show hundreds or even thousands of times for individual accounts seems pretty farfetched to me.

What court battle? What case? And what's it got to do with recording shows on a server? There has been no mention of any court battle so far in this thread.

Having shows available for VOD hasn't been an issue with providers AFAIK. Recording shows without compressing them for streaming to the end user is an unlikely scenario without having a huge amount of bandwidth available. I don't have the actual facts so I'm just making assumptions based on common sense and the way providers tend to do business. Recording the same show hundreds or even thousands of times for individual accounts seems pretty farfetched to me.

just because it wasnt mentioned in this thread, it doesnt mean they werent sued.

you surmised that they would not record each individual show for each user and thought it would be ridiculous, then you surmised that instead the show is served up like VOD.

the way their DVR works is:

Quote:

In contrast, RS-DVR (Remote Storage Digital Video Recorder) refers to a service where a subscriber can record a program and store it on the network. A stored program is only available to the person who recorded it. Should any two persons record the same program, it must for legal reasons be recorded and stored as separate copies. Essentially implementing a traditional DVR with network based storage.

the outcome:

Quote:

On August 5, 2008, the 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in Cartoon Network, LP v. CSC Holdings, Inc., reversed the lower court decision that found the use of RS-DVRs in violation of copyright law.[1] It agreed with Cablevision's argument that a RS-DVR should be treated essentially the same as a customer owned DVR. Only the location of the DVR really differs.[2]

Certain content providers began the process of appealing to the U.S. Supreme Court, seeking cert in late 2008. The Supreme Court delayed hearing the case and instead referred it to the United States Solicitor General's office for the federal government's opinion on the case. In June 2009 the US Supreme Court refused to hear a final appeal in the Cablevision remote DVR case, thereby bringing the years-long litigation to a close.

Actually, that short period you refer to is for the Prime Time Anytime feature. However, even outside of Prime Time, Dish Hoppers do USE ONE tuner for simultaneously providing all the big 4 nets at any time for live viewing or recording. So, if I want to record/watch (or anyone else in the household) programming on my local big net affiliates, I can record Dr. Oz, Judge Judy, and 2 local newscasts--4 programs each on a big 4 affiliate--simultaneously using ONE sat tuner. This can be done 24/7 separate from the Prime Time Anytime feature.

I know, but again, I think "for all practical purposes", that's what the majority of people care about.
That's an opinion of course, I have nothing to back it up with. Heck, even cable channels air their new airings during prime time (but of course they RERUN the heck out of them, which is good and thus helps lessen the tuner requirement.)

Actually, that short period you refer to is for the Prime Time Anytime feature. However, even outside of Prime Time, Dish Hoppers do USE ONE tuner for simultaneously providing all the big 4 nets at any time for live viewing or recording. So, if I want to record/watch (or anyone else in the household) programming on my local big net affiliates, I can record Dr. Oz, Judge Judy, and 2 local newscasts--4 programs each on a big 4 affiliate--simultaneously using ONE sat tuner. This can be done 24/7 separate from the Prime Time Anytime feature.

Oh, then my other response may be wrong then.

Do you mean you are picking shows 'individually'? I did think it was only PTA that had that 'feature', and it was only AFTERWARDS that you could "pick out" specific shows to save (not be auto-wiped by the circular queue of 1 week of PTA).

In other words, I could swear I've read that if you tried to have the equivalent of season passes on multiple network stations, it would try to use separate tuners for them. Maybe that was only originally, and has since changed..

Do you mean you are picking shows 'individually'? I did think it was only PTA that had that 'feature', and it was only AFTERWARDS that you could "pick out" specific shows to save (not be auto-wiped by the circular queue of 1 week of PTA).

In other words, I could swear I've read that if you tried to have the equivalent of season passes on multiple network stations, it would try to use separate tuners for them. Maybe that was only originally, and has since changed..

OK, I think the confusion is this: When the Hopper first came out, it did use ONE tuner for each big 4 net local outside of PTAT. However, for almost a year now, Dish changed it so that ALL viewers or recordings will share ONE tuner for all big 4 nets at any time 24/7.

For example: I am viewing KABC; the kid in the other room is viewing KNBC, and a recording is taking place on KCBS. All of those viewings and recordings are using the SAME ONE tuner. This leaves me with 2 sat tuners and one OTA (if the module is added) available for use. This is 24/7 and is NOT dependent on PTAT.

This is taking advantage of the fact that the big 4 nets in all DMA's are on the same spotbeam transponder, so all the data is their in the stream anyway. It is interesting that it took this long for them to leverage that situation that has existed for over a decade.

The one loss is that Dish saw fit to provide only ONE OTA tuner for each Hopper. Now, if you have 2 Hoppers, than one could use the OTA tuner on the other Hopper, but this is a loss compared to Dish's ViP's that provided TWO OTA tuners.

A bit off topic, but the 9th Circuit upheld the lower courts decision NOT to disable Auto-hop (the commercial skipping feature), during the lawsuit filed by the big 4, and in that ruling stated some pretty clear indications that the networks are going to LOSE on this one. It is rumored that DirecTV has their own commercial skip feature already set to go, but are waiting for the developments in the court cases before they release it, if ever.

Further, it would be great if TiVo had such a feature waiting in the wings, but considering how TiVo has been a major MSO colon crawler from day one, it probably isn't likely that TiVo will ever offer a commercial skip feature.

The 9th circuit ruling is fascinating reading and it is clear Dish lawyers had this one figured out to the T.

just because it wasnt mentioned in this thread, it doesnt mean they werent sued.

The point being that you mentioned it out of the blue and didn't provide a link or explain the context with regards to the discussion at hand. Everybody sues everybody else these days so that's not exactly news. Why they were sued would have been nice to know at the outset since it described the reason why recordings were being made on an individual basis for each subscriber. I was making a rational assumption without knowing anything about the legal issues that backed your claim.

With that in mind, the amount of storage required to support this method of recording could get out of hand in a hurry. Again, I can only assume that the end user will be charged extra for this service. It's probably buried in the rental charge for the box, but it could also be based on the amount of storage the customer uses per month as well.

This is what the BoxeeTV did. All recordings were stored in the cloud for each individual user. It did work. I made dozens of recordings each week and they were all stored in the cloud. But the DVR service never made it out of beta and was shut down when Samsung bought Boxee.

A more recent ruling, regarding Cablevision, I believe, AFFIRMED that recording must be stored as a separate recording for each subscriber and explicitly refused to allow a one recording for all service as that would be VOD and NOT a DVR-type service. Further, such recordings MUST be initiated by the user, etc.

Essentially, this is goes back to Universal vs. Sony, and the crux is "Fair Use" and there must be attributes of the personal home use of the technology as we knew it with the VCR. As long as such attributes are present, it is considered under "Fair Use" and MVPD's and consumers need not worry.

We are not likely to see in our lifetime any cloud DVR service with a one recording for all model, as this was explicitly verboten by the courts, meaning more than one court.

So lets take the crappiness of the actual box out of the equation and just consider the cloud aspect.

Good, no?

With a decent internet connection (and no data caps), this seems like a good idea instead of having 300+ hours of content stored on one local hard drive.

Maybe, maybe not - what if they compress the crap out of it to avoid using too much of your bandwidth? What if their servers are down, or flaky for a few days (this happened a couple of months ago with Comcast's X1 DVRs)? And more importantly, what if their DVRs prevent you from skipping commercials?

Cloud always sounds good on the surface but when you consider the control over your recordings that you're giving up, the tradeoff might not be worth it. You have no ability to save anything locally (for use on tablets, phones, etc.) for example.

This is what the BoxeeTV did. All recordings were stored in the cloud for each individual user. It did work. I made dozens of recordings each week and they were all stored in the cloud. But the DVR service never made it out of beta and was shut down when Samsung bought Boxee.

Which shows the biggest problem with cloud recording. Those recordings aren't actually yours. And yes, I know that those recordings are never technically yours. But having them on your hdd's makes it pretty hard for someone to come along and take them away.

A more recent ruling, regarding Cablevision, I believe, AFFIRMED that recording must be stored as a separate recording for each subscriber and explicitly refused to allow a one recording for all service as that would be VOD and NOT a DVR-type service. Further, such recordings MUST be initiated by the user, etc.

Essentially, this is goes back to Universal vs. Sony, and the crux is "Fair Use" and there must be attributes of the personal home use of the technology as we knew it with the VCR. As long as such attributes are present, it is considered under "Fair Use" and MVPD's and consumers need not worry.

We are not likely to see in our lifetime any cloud DVR service with a one recording for all model, as this was explicitly verboten by the courts, meaning more than one court.

I would like to know technically how the court could inspect and enforce this as the actual way it functions could be buried deep in some programming code. To the user and observer it could look like it was your own copy of what you requested to be recorded. For instance a disk optimization cloud operating system program could be written to examine recordings and if they were identical to eliminate the duplicates by just managing the disk table of contents and all the application code would indicate everyone had there own copy...

I would like to know technically how the court could inspect and enforce this as the actual way it functions could be buried deep in some programming code. To the user and observer it could look like it was your own copy of what you requested to be recorded. For instance a disk optimization cloud operating system program could be written to examine recordings and if they were identical to eliminate the duplicates by just managing the disk table of contents and all the application code would indicate everyone had there own copy...

The key word is identical as in I start my recording 1 minute early or how much over time do I program in for a given sports show, or any other show. Take the CBS 60 minutes program in football season, I add 1 hour to 60 minutes and any show that follows that evening that I may want to watch. What happens when our president interrupts a program because we killed someone important or any other reason, that the time I use OD to get the last part of the program.

The key word is identical as in I start my recording 1 minute early or how much over time do I program in for a given sports show, or any other show. Take the CBS 60 minutes program in football season, I add 1 hour to 60 minutes and any show that follows that evening that I may want to watch. What happens when our president interrupts a program because we killed someone important or any other reason, that the time I use OD to get the last part of the program.

Even if you take all the different possible recording options for 60 minutes which would be maybe 20 different possible copies, it is much less than say 20,000 users recording and storing the same show (maybe 1000 times)....

The real question is whether you'll be able to skip past commercials on any recordings stored in the cloud. I'm just guessing here, but if they compress the programs to reduce storage and bandwidth requirements then playback would probably end up being like any other streamed content. You have to sit through the entire 60 minutes to watch a show instead of watching just the 42 minutes or so of actual programming. I really don't see any advantage to this type of setup for the customer.

Even if you take all the different possible recording options for 60 minutes which would be maybe 20 different possible copies, it is much less than say 20,000 users recording and storing the same show (maybe 1000 times)....